Boyfriend as tenant

SarahMollie

So I'm *hopefully* close to buying my first home (solicitor estimates about 2weeks away from closing). My boyfriend and I currently live together (since Nov 2014) in a rented apartment.

I've been trying to buy since before we moved into our current rented place (actually since before I even met him!) but 3 previous "Sales Agreeds" later and clearly my circumstances have changed. We'll be together 2 years in October.

Obviously I'm hoping that our relationship will go the distance but in the short term we're not engaged, let alone married. I have to be pragmatic and protect my investment, so I'm wondering if anyone has any advice on how best to do so. We've spoken about it and are in agreement that he will be paying me rent. Should he be a tenant with a lease or a licensee as if I was renting a room to someone under the rent a room scheme? If our relationship turns sour, will I be protected?

I'm trying to be as fair as possible in the situation because I wouldn't want him feeling like hes a guest in my house even though essentially thats the situation. Rent will be in line with what he's currently paying even though the house will be a step up.

The reason we're not buying together is that
1) As i mentioned, I've been trying to buy for years so its always something I've been doing for myself
2) I'm making a big life decision - its not on me to impose doing the same on someone else
3) I wouldn't want to put our relationship under unnecessary pressure - I'm sure we'll buy a home together eventually if our relationship works out

Has anyone any experience of sharing a home when only one party is the homeowner?

endacl

I'm in your boyfriends position. I never felt 'at home' till I started paying half the mortgage and bills. You can discuss ownership down the line if you like.

Be aware though, that if you are in a relationship for an extended period, and split up, your boyfriend could claim a beneficial ownership in the property, and it could cost you.

Best have an open And honest chat, and both inform yourselves first.

endacl

More info here.

http://www.flac.ie/download/pdf/cohabiting_couples.pdf

Mrs OBumble

Be aware that if you live together for a certain amount of years (I think 5) and break up after that, then your BF gets rights to the property under the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010.

One way to avoid this would be to make sure that he doesn't get his name on anything - but this can be quite difficult, because you cannot stop him telling Revenue his new address. And of course a rent book or bank-record of rent payments would work against you here too.

I would strongly suggest that you both get independent legal advice about how to protect your interests.



PS I do hope you have a long and happy relationship. But I've seen too many women screwed over by unscrupulous partners to not raise the "what if" scenarios here.

seamus

As he will be sharing the property with you, he will be a licencee, not a tenant. Long story short, you have no legal protection and neither does he. If things turn sour, you can eject him overnight and there's nothing he can do about it.

There is a twist in this one though where he obtains some statutory rights after a period of time: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/cohabiting_couples/rights_of_unmarried_couples.html

General advice is to avoid moving a partner into your property unless you properly feel like it could eventually go the distance. That is, moving in a casual shag is generally a bad idea.

Wabbit Ears

I'd discuss it with a solicitor. My understanding is you are not protected at all if things go sour.

SarahMollie

endacl wrote: »

I'm in your boyfriends position. I never felt 'at home' till I started paying half the mortgage and bills. You can discuss ownership down the line if you like.

Be aware though, that if you are in a relationship for an extended period, and split up, your boyfriend could claim a beneficial ownership in the property, and it could cost you.

Best have an open And honest chat, and both inform yourselves first.

Thanks - just to clarify, we will split bills 50/50 and the rent will cover half my mortgage aprox but I'm capable of covering it all myself if I needed to (ie. if he wasn't living with me, I wouldn't want another tenant.)

I'm thinking of asking him to sign something upfront to prevent him claiming beneficial interest - logically i think this is fair as the rent i'll charge him is actually less that what he'd be paying otherwise - however I'm weary of emasculating him or undermining our relationship etc.

Clearly i stand to benefit if the property goes up in value, and eventually I'll own it outright as an asset, but for the time being, I'm the one putting up a load of my savings, as well as money for improvements/maintenance - Am I wrong to want to have this protected?

Best case scenario is that we get married in a few years and live happily ever after and none of this matters, but I'm a realist and don't want to be a fool.

SarahMollie

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Be aware that if you live together for a certain amount of years (I think 5) and break up after that, then your BF gets rights to the property under the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010.

One way to avoid this would be to make sure that he doesn't get his name on anything - but this can be quite difficult, because you cannot stop him telling Revenue his new address. And of course a rent book or bank-record of rent payments would work against you here too.

I would strongly suggest that you both get independent legal advice about how to protect your interests.



PS I do hope you have a long and happy relationship. But I've seen too many women screwed over by unscrupulous partners to not raise the "what if" scenarios here.

Thanks Mrs O'Bumble!

If we're together a further 5 years (that would be 7 in total) and I havent got a ring on my finger, he'd be long since out on his ear! We're not getting any younger

Dial Hard

SarahMollie wrote:

I'm thinking of asking him to sign something upfront to prevent him claiming beneficial interest - logically i think this is fair as the rent i'll charge him is actually less that what he'd be paying otherwise - however I'm weary of emasculating him or undermining our relationship etc.

I don't think anything you ask him to sign would supercede his rights once the Civil Cohabitation Bill becomes invokable.

Stheno

Dial Hard wrote: »

I don't think anything you ask him to sign would supercede his rights once the Civil Cohabitation Bill becomes invokable.

Agreed be can't sign it away

endacl

That's the thing about rights. They're your's whether you want them or not.

Your boyfriend might, if things go south for whatever reason, think differently in the future.

What if your relationship ends in 20 years and, after contributing half the cost of the house over this period, he's left with no home and no deposit for a place of his own?

lima

I think it's terribly tight to be charging a loved one rent in this situation.

I was in the same situation and the plan was always to pay the mortgage myself and let herself not pay anything except for a bit of groceries and maybe bills.

If someone is that tight that they need to charge their boyfriend rent and make him sign something then it appears that they think it won't work out..

endacl

lima wrote: »

I think it's terribly tight to be charging a loved one rent in this situation.

I was in the same situation and the plan was always to pay the mortgage myself and let herself not pay anything except for a bit of groceries and maybe bills.

If someone is that tight that they need to charge their boyfriend rent and make him sign something then it appears that they think it won't work out..

An adult should pay their way. Full stop.

Dial Hard

lima wrote:

I think it's terribly tight to be charging a loved one rent in this situation.

was in the same situation and the plan was always to pay the mortgage myself and let herself not pay anything except for a bit of groceries and maybe bills.

If someone is that tight that they need to charge their boyfriend rent and make him sign something then it appears that they think it won't work out..

It's not even remotely tight. Why on earth should the partner get to live there FOC?

Do you think parents who expect adult children to hand over money are tight too? Because I think it's eminently reasonable. Adults who are earning money should contribute to the household they're living in, simple as.

jlm29

lima wrote: »

I think it's terribly tight to be charging a loved one rent in this situation.

I was in the same situation and the plan was always to pay the mortgage myself and let herself not pay anything except for a bit of groceries and maybe bills.

If someone is that tight that they need to charge their boyfriend rent and make him sign something then it appears that they think it won't work out..

I would consider it awfully tight to be scrounging off someone who was working hard to pay a mortgage. I would also consider it very silly for someone to essentially hand over rights to their property just by being silly enough to do a bit of research and protect their interests. If things work out well, the op will be better off financially and possibly have a nice little savings fund built up that will benefit her and her oh in their future.

lima

Dial Hard wrote: »

It's not even remotely tight. Why on earth should the partner get to live there FOC?

Do you think parents who expect adult children to hand over money are tight too? Because I think it's eminently reasonable. Adults who are earning money should contribute to the household they're living in, simple as.

Actually, I will elaborate.. I also had an agreement that my partner would save the equivalent to their share of the mortgage in a savings account. The plan was that if we got married then they would be able to contribute to the mortgage/towards another property.

It IS extremely tight to suggest to your partner that you pay rent towards their mortgage and at the same time sign a statement saying they will not claim any ownership to the property. And a lease? That's very tight..

A relationship is not a business, you can't expect to make money from your partner.

lima

jlm29 wrote: »

I would consider it awfully tight to be scrounging off someone who was working hard to pay a mortgage. I would also consider it very silly for someone to essentially hand over rights to their property just by being silly enough to do a bit of research and protect their interests. If things work out well, the op will be better off financially and possibly have a nice little savings fund built up that will benefit her and her oh in their future.

If they are not paying anything at all then yes. Contribution towards living expenses of course but not essentially paying towards their other halves investment that she has no intention of sharing.

Separately, Plenty of women living for free with men in similar situations. If it were a man asking should they charge their female partner rent I wonder what the general opinion would be.

The Randy Riverbeast

lima wrote: »

If they are not paying anything at all then yes. Contribution towards living expenses of course but not essentially paying towards their other halves investment that she has no intention of sharing.

Separately, Plenty of women living for free with men in similar situations. If it were a man asking should they charge their female partner rent I wonder what the general opinion would be.

They will share the investment if the relationship lasts. He also has the benefit of being able to walk away without having a mortgage to help pay.

He would have to pay rent somewhere. He can hardly expect to live somewhere rent free. Unless her partner is paying for all other bills and food then it wont come close to what she is having to pay.

TheChizler

Slightly tangentially, what's to stop a licensee who's not in a relationship with the landlord claiming beneficial ownership after 5 years? Witnesses giving evidence that they're not a couple? Lack of coupley pictures?

JohnBee

lima wrote: »

It IS extremely tight to suggest to your partner that you pay rent towards their mortgage and at the same time sign a statement saying they will not claim any ownership to the property. And a lease? That's very tight..

Your elaboration was even worse.

Living costs money in the real world. Having a roof over your head is a living expense. It is also realistic to assume there is a probability the relationship will end. She is taking the risk with the mortgage. Additionally if he wasn't living with her I presume he would be paying rent, unless he found a landlord that wasn't "tight" and let him live there for free.

Your alternative arrangement sounds perfectly reasonable and it is good that it worked for you. But expecting an adult (partner or not) to pay rent is not unreasonable.

testaccount123

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

They will share the investment if the relationship lasts.

But she will have profited from him if it doesnt. I can kind of see limas point. I'd question if now is the right time to be buying at all, its hardly a vote of confidence in the relationship.

lima

JohnBee wrote: »

Your elaboration was even worse.

Living costs money in the real world. Having a roof over your head is a living expense. It is also realistic to assume there is a probability the relationship will end. She is taking the risk with the mortgage. Additionally if he wasn't living with her I presume he would be paying rent, unless he found a landlord that wasn't "tight" and let him live there for free.

Your alternative arrangement sounds perfectly reasonable and it is good that it worked for you. But expecting an adult (partner or not) to pay rent is not unreasonable.

I can see what you are saying (minus the patronizing), but lets forget about the guys situation for a second.

In this situation she is going to have a mortgage one way or another, whether they are together or not, and she has the ability to pay it all herself (else she wouldn't have gotten a mortgage) so charging her partner rent is just capitalizing on an opportunity to make more money, and ensuring someone doesn't get away with living for free.

In the interest if fairness perhaps he should contribute to something (I think savings account is a good idea) but this is a tricky situation. Treating a partner like a tenant is not the way to go about this sensitive situation.

JohnBee

lima wrote: »

In this situation she is going to have a mortgage one way or another, whether they are together or not, and she has the ability to pay it all herself (else she wouldn't have gotten a mortgage) so charging her partner rent is just capitalizing on an opportunity to make more money, and ensuring someone doesn't get away with living for free.

She is not capitalizing. She is just making him pay his way in the world. Unlike what most people think, buying a house is not a straight savings plan. In her first few years alone, approximately 80% or more of what she pays to the bank will be interest. Additionally, when the property is paid for, there is no guarantee that she will have the equity she paid.

I don't understand why in Ireland people do not understand how having a roof is a cost of living. It explains why people in Ireland see rent as dead money and we have disproportionately high ownership rates compared to much of Europe. Unless he is unemployed, then as an adult he should see that living includes a cost of accommodation, including the bills that go with it. Unless he is living with her and forgoing plans to buy a house based on this, then if he was not with her he would have to pay the going rate for bills etc. Why should it be different because the landlord is his girlfriend?

Mrs OBumble

TheChizler wrote: »

Slightly tangentially, what's to stop a licensee who's not in a relationship with the landlord claiming beneficial ownership after 5 years? Witnesses giving evidence that they're not a couple? Lack of coupley pictures?

Indeed. This is something that all single property owners with housemates should be aware of.

Addle

'Intimate' relationship a prerequisite to avail of such rights.

Dial Hard

Mine would be the exact same. Hence my use of gender-unspecific nouns in my post.

athtrasna

I've been in this situation from a different point of view. I was the licensee who started dating the home owner after a year. All the way through I paid rent...until we got married and bought somewhere else together. I wanted to buy our own home, the other place always felt like his house.

I couldn't have lived in his house and not paid rent, I'm no freeloader. The OP's boyfriend wants to contribute which to me is a very good thing.

runawaybishop

lima wrote: »

I can see what you are saying (minus the patronizing), but lets forget about the guys situation for a second.

In this situation she is going to have a mortgage one way or another, whether they are together or not, and she has the ability to pay it all herself (else she wouldn't have gotten a mortgage) so charging her partner rent is just capitalizing on an opportunity to make more money, and ensuring someone doesn't get away with living for free.

In the interest if fairness perhaps he should contribute to something (I think savings account is a good idea) but this is a tricky situation. Treating a partner like a tenant is not the way to go about this sensitive situation.

The partner has no problem with it, what's it to you in all fairness.

wowy

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

I'd discuss it with a solicitor. My understanding is you are not protected at all if things go sour.

Dial Hard wrote: »

I don't think anything you ask him to sign would supercede his rights once the Civil Cohabitation Bill becomes invokable.

Stheno wrote: »

Agreed be can't sign it away

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/problems_in_marriages_and_other_relationships/redress_scheme_for_cohabiting_couples.html

See the section here about Voluntary Agreements. Essentially, yes, both parties can come to an agreement that the protections granted under the Act will not apply should the relationship end.

Mrs OBumble

Addle wrote: »

'Intimate' relationship a prerequisite to avail of such rights.

Indeed.

But if the so called ex has proof of address in the house and claims that there was an intimate relationship which has now broken down, then it could be hard to prove there wasn't one. Especially if they happen to be a bit clever with photos.

Arbiter of Good Taste

lima wrote: »

Separately, Plenty of women living for free with men in similar situations. If it were a man asking should they charge their female partner rent I wonder what the general opinion would be.

Ah come on now. This is just a ridiculous argument